medical school students. and later, republican congressman joe barton discusses some 2012 campaign issues. "washington journal" is next. >> if you've got cable tv and you turn on the senate, a lot of people across america are calling into the cable channel providers and asking for a refund. why do we have this channel and when nothing happens except an occasional mention of a senator's name during a quorum call? 382 filibusters on the republican side. 382 delays in the senate.

host: from the senate floor, dick durbin of illinois and. that's how the day began yesterday. democrats and republicans pointing fingers on congressional gridlock. good morning, it's friday, september 21. house convenes in two hours in what's likely to be the final day for lawmakers before the november election. senate is back in session today. the new "new york times is calling this congress the least productive in a generation. that's where we begin today with your calls and comments. join the conversation on this friday morning. you can send us an e-mail or join us online at twitter or join us on facebook. let's go to the new york times piece that call this

congressional session the least successful in a generation. "usa today" has this headline -- on the senate floor yesterday,

the republican leader mitch mcconnell had this to say. [video clip] >> a number of our colleagues have already spoken about the huge problems that we face and the president's complete failure to lead. we have a $16 trillion debt, millions out of work, the biggest tax hike in history looming, and our military faces crippling across-the-board cuts. the nation and the world needs strong american leadership and robust political institutions to meet these challenges. but the president, with a lot of help from the democratic- controlled senate, has deliberately chosen inaction. why? because over the past two years the democratic senate has seen

itself as an extension of the president's reelection campaign rather than a forum for solving the nation's problems. everything that it has done and has not done is meant to help the president and not the american people. so our problems have only gotten worse and the senate has completely broken down as an institution. host: yesterday, senate republican leader mitch mcconnell. this front page of the washington times -- let's get to your calls and comments. john has this --

vanessa's on the republican line from arizona. caller: i wasa just watching -- i was just watching the massachusetts debate, and i know this is not what this is about. congress has not been doing any progression or progress, because no one can seem to agree on anything. host: we will share what harry reid said that affected the senate agenda in a moment. one of our viewers had this to say -- next is darnell joining us from

kansas. caller: it is a do nothing congress because of the republicans' unwillingness to compromise on matters that are very important to america. they absolutely refused to do the work of the american people. i cannot believe mr. mcconnell is talking about the president the way he is, because he is the main person -- he is the leader of the republican senate. we all know the statement that he made. it is just a shame. the folks that both these guys in, but the party, they are responsible for this, the do nothing aspect. obviously, they are opposed to the president and opposed to having america made progress. host: thanks for the call. next is kelly and joining us

from river falls, wisconsin on our independent line. caller: good morning. this is a system the founders gave us. the house seems to pass a lot of things that die in the senate. the senate cannot pass anything because of the filibuster rule. partisanship is what holds things up. maybe everybody when they go to the polls they should look at who the incumbent is and just vote the opposite. i know we would be voted out some good people, but maybe it would send a message to our legislators. if we keep putting in fresh faces, they would get the message that they had better get to work. thanks for c-span. thanks for the opportunity. host: thanks for the call. abby is on the phone from leesburg, virginia on our republican line. caller: i was just calling to say i agree with the last

caller that we do have quite a bit of standstill because people are mostly focused on the politics of just polarizing the different parties than actually agreeing to compromise. however, i do appreciate some of the social issues, specifically abortion, that they don't compromise as much. not every issue needs to be such a hard-line. host: thank you. twitter --ion if you are listening on c-span radio, we are talking about congress, expected to wrap up

business today, recessing for the november elections and then back for a busy lame-duck session. mike has this story -- is more from the democratic leader nancy pelosi of california. [video clip] >> members of congress that were elected to a job, not just to hold the job by campaigning. but republicans are not

interested in working together to create jobs and grow the economy and strengthen the middle-class. between august 3 when we adjourned and november 13 when we are scheduled to come back to session, august 3 through november 14 we have been in session eight days. not even eight full days. tomorrow is september 21 and that will mark the earliest adjournment of congress since 1960. >host: from a viewer in minnesota -- bill has this --

michael is on the phone from carlisle, pennsylvania on the democratic line. caller: what nancy pelosi said its the truth. the republicans havwon the house talking about jobs. they have not passed a single jobs bill. on the senate side, you have mitch mcconnell, who is the minority leader, he says his number one job is to make president obama a one-term president, not working on any jobs, not working on any infrastructure, not helping out anything, just making the president a one-term president. i think we need to get the republicans out of there and let's get some democrats in and let's get things done. thanks for taking my call. host: thank you. michael is on the phone, from new albany, ohio,.

caller: good morning. we are in our mid 60's. we believe and trust in our country and that's supposed to be by the people and for the people. all the things have become so political, partisan situation where the job does not get done, we elect a congressman and the senate people, they get these cushy positions. sometimes they say things for us, but things don't get done. we look at the events of the last week or so. you have a president who did not open his mouth when things were tragic and everything was going on in the middle east. regardless of the campaign, he should've been in washington and addressing the american people. he is the president. he should be giving us some sol -- solace and confidence that the government will stand by us. it's a shame. then you have the one side and the other side. we get things every day in the mail, all the money spent on

just the mail coming in to convince us to vote for this one or that one could pay for so many things to help folks. it is a ridiculous waste of time, waste of money trying to convince people of things and you don't really know what they believe or don't. i think it is so unfair. i know you have an incumbent president. when a president is in and running for office, it is so unfair that they could be the worst president in the world -- which i agree the man is good, but not a good president, he could be the worst president or the best president, but when he makes that phone call, no one is going to turn down talking to the president. when he makes a call and says i would like to speak to your group porterage or your company or whatever, no one is going to turn down the president of united states. it is a very unfair advantage of our tax dollars.

host: and this -- and from seattle -- later this morning on the c- span networks and on c-span radio, the house ethics committee is expected to clear charges against representative maxine waters, democrat from california. the piece says --

a staff would not be entirely off the hook. her chief of staff and grandson are likely to be held accountable for reaching housecoats of conduct. when the house ethics committee meets in the republic session at 9:15 eastern time today, that michael moore will be held accountable for seeking to leverage waters' influence to aid a bank. she's been facing a similar conflict of interest charged since 2009. that headline, maxine waters expected to be cleared of conflict of interest charges. if you can watch or listen to the hearings on the c-span networks, c-span radio, and any time on c-span.org. dallas is on the phone from asheville, north carolina. the new york times calling this the least productive congress in a generation. caller: thank you, steve. you are doing a great job, as usual. i am tired of seeing all the

illusion that is in the left and right politics of our country. anyone that ever does any real research as far as conspiracy theory and no matter what evidence is presented and what goes on from way back, everything that's happening along the way is ratcheting down on the rights of the american people. it's destroying the humanity of our planet. it is high time that the people really get a sober look at this thing and talk to their neighbors and really figure out how we are going to be able to get our representation anin government back into the people's hands and away from the criminals. host: thanks for the call. this story --

senator tom coburn, as the republicans blamed democrats for inaction in washington, yesterday. [video clip] >> what we have had, i would remind my colleagues, is a history in the senate of doing hard things. under the leadership of senator harry reid, the senate has not attempted to do hard things. it has attempted to abandon the task that should be in front of

us. america deserves better. it deserves better leadership. it deserves leadership based on bringing this country together rather than dividing this country. not having at a fiscal plan to solve the greatest issues in front of our country is an absolute failure of leadership. host: that was senator tom coburn yesterday on the senate floor. let's go back to the new "new iece --mes i" peac we are asking your thoughts about the sentiment that this was the least productive congress in a generation. with your phone calls or on our

twitter page. lisa is on the phone from nashville, tennessee, of the democratic line. caller: good morning, steve. i am really upset about the senate and the filibuster's that have been historical high. the filibuster is somewhat controversial through history. but it has never been used as many times as it has been this time. i hope that with the new congress, they might be able to vote. at the beginning of the session, they vote on the rules. i understand they may not be able to change something. but we cannot go on like this. host: thanks for the call. let's go back through "usa today" --

randy is on the phone from georgia, on our republican line. caller: thanks for taking my call. it looks very positive that the republicans will take over the senate because of the number of seats up for election. if the republicans take over the house, it will be interesting to

see how the filibuster works. that rule was created to make sure the bills passed are palatable to most senators. the reason republicans are standing united is [indiscernible] host: joseph has this -- ron has this -- lewis is on the phone from upstate new york. caller: my vote for president will not count because i am in new york.

that because of the electoral college. my vote is automatically democratic. i vote independent and i will be voting for the third party again for president. my vote does count down-ballot. i will be voting down-ballot or democrat. host: a couple comments from our facebook page, first from beverly --

join us online on facebook or send us an e-mail. fran is on the phone from jacksonville, florida. caller: i would like to comment on the politicians that about doing the hard things, as we saw a moment ago on the television. that keyword, hard things, those are the things that affect regular american people. those hard things don't affect those people at the top. that's what they are pushing for. one of your callers was talking about the president and not coming on television to reassure the american people rather than campaigning. in the virginia focus group, the

number one thing that most people said about him was the the characteristic was being cool. they should know our president by now. the fact that he is out campaigning does not mean that he is not addressing what is happening in the middle east. our finding and killing bin laden is evidence of that. host: the focus group that she mentioned, that's available on our website. a gathering of 12th either undecided or leaning towards mitt romney or barack obama voters, which took place in fairfax, virginia, one of the key battleground states. that's available on our website. the christian science monitor focusing on the independent or undecided voters --

about the new york post looking at some of the latest polls from the fox news channel and from the nbc news/washington journal. both surveys looking at florida, ohio, and virginia. the front page of the new york times --

from the new york times, a look at how much money mitt romney has on and -- -- on hand -- more details inside the new york times.

back to your calls on this congress, called the least productive in a generation by the new york times. john is on the phone from pennsylvania. caller: success should not be measured by how much legislation passes. if you are conservative and republican, you believe in a smaller federal government, meaning less legislation, that would mean it would be more successful. whatever legislation passes is pretty much useless unless the executive decides to enforce the law. for example, immigration. i have yet to see a president, democratic or republican, enforce our laws. and polls showing that romney will lose, that has nothing to do with who will show up to the polls to vote in november. i think a lot of republicans will be energized to go out and first, versus the democrats who

collect benefits and do nothing. host: from one of our viewers th-- new york senator chuck schumer yesterday -- [video clip] >> we in the senate said let's focus on areas of common agreement and to guarantee no middle-class households will face a tax cut on january 1. we succeeded in passing. a middle-class tax passing once again, speaker boehner will not work with us. those are two examples of senate-passed bills that the house will not put on the floor. reality is, for as divided as the senate is, we passed a large number of bipartisan bills this year. very important bills. but it takes two chambers to pass a law. on the other side, too many

congress members, particularly the tea party folks, i think compromise is a dirty word. host: new york senator chuck schumer, democrat, joined by democratic leader harry reid. the national journal posted this piece this morning on taxes -- enthusiasm for the payroll tax cut has waned on capitol hill, it says, as lawmakers start to meet privately to overtax extenders and the fiscal cliff and no one has taken up the cause of extending the payroll tax-cut. concern over diverting revenue from social security to help pay for the cuts has only grown in

the last two years since it was passed. the piece has a photograph of congressman standing ordehoyer. he says it's temporary. no call from georgia, curtis. caller: thanks for taking my call. what the man said from pennsylvania about the legislation, the more of it that is passed, the bigger the government. that is astounding but someone would think that. and it is astounding, working four month at an average salary of $15,000 to $18,000 a month, they will only work eight days. there's no compromise in our country, no one wants to work together. it is sad. this is why we have to find a

third-party alternative to do something about this. the partisan zealots on the , it hasd lefthe left become crazy. and i used to be on the left. we have to find an alternative to get the government working for the people. thank you. host: and this -- and -- randy is on the phone from michigan. welcome to the conversation. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span and allowing us to speak and put our voices out. i believe -- i am really glad

that we have the do nothing congress, in a way. i want to thank the democrats for trying to save america. i do believe some of their policies on the republican side were just too extreme. i have no problem with compromise. but when you start extreme, you cannot read somebody on a compromise. so there's blame on both sides. but i do believe the democrats are the only people out there that have the spirit to fight for the american dream for all of us. the republicans just seem to be interested in if you made it, i will help you out and if not, get off the bottom of my shoe because you are slowing me down. host: appreciate the call. from the globe -- and from the wall street journal

-- yesterday, secretary of state clinton, who traveled to capitol hill for two sessions with democrats and republicans,

although some critics claim it was not enough information to warrant that national security briefing that took place on capitol hill. the least productive congress in a generation, that's what the new york times calls it it. what are your thoughts? miranda is on the phone. from manchester phone. miranda is on the phone from manchester, connecticut. president whothiswh had two years to do everything he wanted. he said obamacare would not raise taxes and now we find out it will raise taxes for everyone. it is disgraceful that no one's holding him accountable. host: from usa today --

we carry that live on the c-span networks. exchangeen ing was this -- [video clip] >> she claimed to be a person of color and you can see that she is not. she checked the box. she claimed she was a native american when applying to harvard. clearly she is not. i don't know and the viewers don't know whether she got ahead as a result of that. the only way we will be able to find that out is to have her release her personal records and have harvard released the records to make sure she did not have an advantage that others were entitled to. you have to pass a test in our senate and that is one of character and honesty and truthfulness.

i believe she has failed that test. host: that was from last night's debates in boston. kyle trygstad is joining us on the phone. guest: thanks for having me. host: that was how scott brown began the debate. guest: that was the least surprising thing of the night. he mustthis race, she mus get a sizable chunk of democrats in massachusetts not to vote for her. it looks like this year scott brown will need about a half- million democrats who voted for obama to vote for him. host: some polls have elizabeth warren of three percentage points and another one has scott brown up three points.

it shows how close the race is. host: there are undecided voters remaining. that's a good thing for scott brown. it is tough running as a republican in a very democratic state in a presidential year. if there's one republican who can do it, is him. if there's one democrat who can beat him, democrats are pretty confident elizabeth warren can do that. host: you have to notice that during the course of the debate, senator brown continued to refer to elizabeth warren as professor. guest: he wants to paint her as an elitist, someone who may be the working-class democrats in south boston cannot relate to. that is something we have seen since she got into the race. she criticized him for voting against president obama's supreme court nominee elena kagan. brown said i'm sorry i did not

vote for your boss. it is a pattern of painting her as an elitist. host: yesterday on the senate floor, something unusual happened. senator reid interrupted senator al franken of minnesota and said there would be no more votes last night so senators could go about their business and indirectly referred to scott brown and whether he would go would depend on the senate vote. senator reid cleared the table. guest: reid said this is not my first rodeo and brown is not getting out of that debate, we want him debated. this is a very important race for harry reid to keep his job as senate majority leader. he wants elizabeth warren. host: let's listen to how elizabeth warren responded to the opening charged by senator scott brown last night at the

debates in boston. [video clip] >> what this race is about is the issues. that's what is important, not if someone says a few good things some of the time but how someone votes all the time it. senator brown wants to raise an issue about my character, then i will lay it out there. when i was growing up, if these were the stories i knew about my heritage. i believe my mother and my father and my aunts and all schools and never asked anybody for documentation. i do know this about my parents, my mother and father loved each other very much and wanted to get married and my father's family said no, because my mother was part delaware and part cherokee. all of our lives, for my three brothers and me, that was a big issue of separation in our family. i never used it before getting into college or getting into law school. the people who hired me for my

jobs have all made clear they did not know about until long after i was hired. so i think it is out there with the story is. host: clearly elizabeth warren was prepared for that charge. guest: yes, this is something she has had to answer constantly. republicans have been hitting her on this as well as reporters. their argument is this is someone who has made a career of being a consumer advocate along with being a professor and maybe she was cheating to get ahead. she has a very good explanation for it. anyone who knows oklahoma is a lot of people there do have native american heritage. so she clearly was prepared for this. host: kyle trygstad, following all this. we will be getting all the debates on the c-span networks. thanks for sharing your insights with us. another debate that took place yesterday which we will air on

monday evening on c-span, it took place on the nbc affiliate in washington. david gregory was the moderator. in a headline from the washington post -- back to your calls. congress, the least productive in a generation. asheboro, north carolina, good morning. share and are you with us -- sharon, are you with us? caller: good morning.

i have listened to all this conversation about the president and romney. i know that republicans don't care about poor people. they are just in it for themselves. host: thanks for the call. from "usa today" -- and there's a related story this morning from the wall street journal --

louis is on the phone from north carolina. welcome to the program. caller: good morning. it is ironic that we have a republican congress. it is ironic that the republicans crashed to the economy. people lost their jobs and their homes and their pensions, and now they will be a do nothing congress, not working with the president. host: and this --

our last call is mike from virginia on our republican line . caller: hey, there. republicans have sent quite a few jobs bill from their end of congress in the house. they have all been. killed in. republicans have passed a budget bill in the house. harry reid has refused to take it up for a vote in the senate. what that does is it forces congress to pass continuing resolutions for continued spending at current levels when we are already $15 trillion in debt. . every time we pass a continuing resolution, we go deeper into debt. host: and this --

thanks for your calls and comments that you shared with us your thoughts about congress as it wrapped up business. the house will gavel in in about an hour and 15 minutes. live coverage on c-span3 the senate is also in session today. we will have the national book festival this weekend for the 12th year in a row, on the mall in washington, d.c. -- live coverage on c-span of the house. 48 hours of "book tv from the national book festival this weekend. coming up, jim mcdermott, the democrat of washington, will join us.

and in about a half-hour, represented joe barton, republican of texas. it's friday, september 21. we are back in a moment. >> ♪ ♪ [video clip] >> i attribute to my wanting to get more involved with politics is watching information on c- span. i love the information. i love the current events. i love the hot topics, things that come up. i love watching it and pulling it up on my mobile device. >> she watches c-span on cox communications. c-span, created by america's cable companies in 1979, brought to you as a public service by your television provider.

>> if you were trying to write a story about a couple, about their intimate lives and what happened during and after their relationship, the lincolns offer limited possibilities. i used to think it was so unique. lincoln is mesmerizing. you do get mesmerized by this thing about the lincoln and you start wondering about why did married to this for lincoln? then i am able to see in the world around me that there have been other presidential wives, other women of privilege who have been accused of illnesses. i used the princess diana defense. was she not a daughter of

privilege? was she not someone who had the to pendu -- had a tempestuous? courtship >> this weekend, the life of mary todd lincoln, sunday at 7:30 eastern and pacific on c-span3. "washington journal" continues. host: as congress wraps up business we are checking in with congressman jim mcdermott, a member of the house ways and means committee. thanks for joining us. guest: my pleasure. host: one story that got our attention this past week is a report from the american association of medical colleges, estimating that by 2015, the country will have 62,900 fewer doctors than are needed. guest: it is a huge problem.

you have retirement. people get old and they'd say they are not going to practice medicine anymore. it is harder and harder for kids school.o medical and we have not expanded our classes enough in medical school to deal with the expanding population. we are going to implement a bill where we take 30 million people who have not had help care before and give them access to the system. it is estimated by 2020 that we will be short 45,000 primary care doctors. so we have a number of very near-term problems that we have to start dealing with. host: and primary care physicians over the next 10 or 15 years, 100,000 fewer doctors than are needed. people are looking at the president's health care law as one of the reasons it.

was that fully taken into account when you and other democrats implemented the law? guest: yes, when we went down to the white house before this all started i told them of a program i am proposing, because i said you will need a lot of primary care doctors. the problem in massachusetts was they took in everybody and then people went around saying where can i find a doctor, because doctors are not taking any more patients because they are full. it was clear the same thing would go on nationally. we put some provisions in to expand the national health service corps and some programs that had been there before, but in my view they were too small, too little too late, because we are going to have a major problem in 10 years. host: if you take a college student who is thinking about medical school, it will take him or her eight years to 10 years to go through school appeared

still talking about an eight- year to 10-year proposition to make them a full-fledged opposition. host: i spent four years in medical school and then did a one-your internship and then my residency. i was there nine or 10 years after college. if somebody is going to go into primary care, you could probably do medical school and then one or two years. you are talking at least seven years to go from saying we are going to fix the problem and it will be seven years before you get to it. so this requires planning out into the future. host: our phone lines are open for dr. mcdermott, the congressman. and you contact us over the internet. many people like to go into certain other areas because it's more profitable or they would

still lot less headaches because of the paperwork and all that's involved for surgeons and physicians. host: i put forth a program. i took a model of the military which has the rotc. we give a kid a college scholarship and a stipend. when he or she finishes, they served in the military four years or five years. i said why not do the same thing with medical school? give kids a chance to understand that if they go into medical school, they will have their tuition paid and get a stipend and then they will owe the state five years of practice in underserved area. it could be a rural area for a densely populated part of the urban area where there's not enough help. what is troubling medical students today is they come out

$175,000 in debt or more. when i finished medical school in 1953 from the university of illinois, i spent $800 a semester, $1,600 per year. i could work and pay eight it. they cannot now because the tuition is killing them. a program of tuition forgiveness in exchange for service to your country is really what we are proposing. host: 20 plus years in congress. it has among the lowest approval ratings. the least productive congress in a generation. as you look back -- and the democrats are blaming republicans and republicans blaming democrats -- what is the reason there's so little agreement on so many key issues including support things like a spending bill? guest: i think we are not being

too partisan. mitch mcconnell made it very clear in 2009 when he said my number one job is to prevent barack obama from getting a second term. that has set the kind of strategy that has made it very hard to get the tough issues through. added to that was the party candidates who came to congress who knew very little about the process and were not willing to compromise. they made compromise a dirty word but. i have been doing this for years. i was in the legislature 16 years and i've been here 24 years. we always have to compromise. i never get 100% of what i want. if i get 50% i think i really scored. but most of the time you compromise. the idea that you cannot compromise does not work in our democracy. host: after the election, say

congress remains divided. regardless of who is in the white house, there needs to be a compromise on dealing with the $16 trillion debt, will the politics be different after the election? guest: absolutely. you already see it in the paper. republicans are talking about it in the washington post. they will have to deal with this whole issue. they cannot have no compromise. we are hitting a cliff where all the tax cuts will go away. and we are hitting a wall that says we have to cut big amounts of money out of defense and non discretionary -- both sides of the budget will have to be cut deeply. so they are going to be faced with awfully difficult questions. they are already saying, if obama is reelected, but we will

have to raise taxes. we have said that all along. we have said you cannot solve the problems in the country without increased revenue. you can make cuts. all of us know about cuts and we have done them. but there needs to be additional revenue. we gave away revenue into thousand with the bush tax cuts and we are paying the piper in 2012. host: sarah is on the phone from meridian, mississippi. good morning. caller: thanks for c-span. i love the health care bill. my husband developed cancer during the health care debate. he was fired after seven weeks of the company finding out he had cancer. i know a lot of this has happened to people all over the

country besides ourselves. in regard to congress and stuff, the republican congress has stagnated this country from going forward. senator mcconnell should've been fired way back when. there have been jobs bills put on the table in congress. they have been on a long lame- duck session forever. i just wanted to state that, all the things they would not pass, all the things they would not address, i find it absolutely appalling. host: your husband, when he battled cancer, was able to get medical treatment? caller: i ended up in front of a judge to continue on with his health care. he had had a major surgery and a

large tumor on his liver. this has been three years. he still has some health problems, but he does not have the tumor any more. host: thanks and good luck with your husband. guest: she is emblematic of what the problem in this country is. we do not have health care security. we have social security and a lot of other things, but for most families they are always living with the fear that they will lose their health insurance or that their health insurance will not cover what they have. i fly back and forth to seattle 35 times a year. i'm watching clyde attendants get older. they are still flying at age 60. i ask them why and they say because i have health care coverage but my husband has a job where he does not. everybody in this country is worried about it. 2013 is the year we will implement the bill and it will

change the country dramatically in terms of people's comfort about situations like this woman has described. when you think you have a health insurance policy and then something happens and suddenly it's not worth anything, it is a terrifying experience. host: from one of our viewers -- guest: one of the problems with sequestration is it is an across-the-board cutbacks. -- cut. host: what is the etymology of that word sequestration? guest: it means seeking back inside. it comes from latin and it is a medical term. it means you are holding stuff in. this issue of holding back,

here's the issue, i think, all give you an example. we send money to the national institutes of health. every day people are on channels choosing which research we should do over the next three years and giving out money in grants. we're now finding one out of nine. not fillingou're the research. our research in this country ultimately will go down. you have to keep putting money into that. when people say don't cut the national institutes of health by 10%, they're not thinking what that means 10 years out. that's the real problem.

guest: my dad has a lot of experience in southeastern insurance. i wanted to ask the congressman, does he think that the with the health care law was put into place or addressed insurance versus the providers themselves? i know that the availability of providers in primary care and special days, you have to work hard to be able to get in --

guest: the president had two problems. one is access. the second is how to control costs. most of what we did is access. we made it impossible for people to be able to go to an insurance exchange in the state and choose a policy that they can afford. and if they have enough money, we will subsidize them. we're helping employers, so they can also offer to their people a health care plan. we have tried to figure out all the places where you have to make it affordable to people. you and i do not have lamberty these. -- we want to buy a plan for everyone that covers the basic needs will meet. if you are out there alone -- i

think the american people are going to be amazed. they already are. i remember when my kids got out of college and they cannot get insurance or they were not going to get it. i was worried. now you can keep your kids on the policy until age 26 and you can get a job with benefits bigger that is already in place. we have a variety of things that are already going in, but the big changes are going to come in 2013. host: we are talking to representative mcdermott. i asked about sequestration. it means too afraid of losing your job. guest: that is kind of the

issue. host: a call from california with congressman jim mcdermott. caller: good morning, gentlemen. congressman, i am libertarian. so i believe there is already a dangerous level of power. especially the democratic politicians are blind to this concentration of power. as some bit -- exhibit a, the controversial death panels. i think the democratic politicians have a blind spot. guest: actually, that was manufactured by people who were trying to destroy the president's plan. what we put into the accountable care act was a provision that said a doctor could sit and be paid for, talking with you about what your final directives want to be. every american, as your civic duty, should sit down with your

family and your doctor and decide what you want to do when you are close to death. because 40% of the money we spend in this country is spent in the last six months of life and does practically no good because the person is now so sick they can make decisions for themselves. the doctor cannot say, well, i am not going to treat him any more because he will not get better. as a physician, you must take care of the patient. this final directives, and they are tough. i remember having this discussion of my own father. i said, you have had a stroke, dad, and there is a possibility that your heart may stop. what do you want us to do when that happens? he said, well, i watched television and i do not like those paddles. they make you jump. i do not want that to happen. i said, d one external massage, pressing on your chest to make your heart starts again. i went to the doctor and he said that your father made the wrong

mistake because the paddles are much less invasive. they do not hurt you. if you have a big intern pressing on your father's chest, it will break the reds and your father will have pain. but you have to have a discussion. when i told my dad with the doctor said, he said of the doctor says that is what will happen, that is what we should do. so we have to have the discussion. doctors do not get paid -- doctors get paid for that. it takes time. you cannot go through this kind of discussion in an instant. it is not like taking a blood or urine sample. this takes time. we tried to pay for that. well, people called that death panels. we were paying more physicians to spend time to talk to you about how you want your life to end. woody allen said -- nobody gets out of here alive. host: yesterday, you and your colleagues were debating the issue of welfare to work.

it was an issue with mitt romney, saying that the president was trying to gut that part of the program. your colleague of michigan had this to say on the house floor. [video clip] >> on july 12 of this year, the obama administration issued an information memorandum to waive the will for work requirement in an unlawful end run around the current congress. the administration's action is unlawful on two fronts. first, the welfare work requirements are contained in section of the social security act that may not be waived according to that law. second, the nonpartisan government accountability office determined that the administration's information memorandum qualifies as a whirl and therefore should have been officially submitted to the congress foreview before being issued. it was not. >host: congressmen, your reaction? guest: first of all, the

president did not gut the welfare act. it is still in place and has work requirements. but the president was dealing with the fact we have paralysis. you cannot get anything done. the governors were coming to him saying we have ideas about how you can make the welfare plan work better. the president sent out a letter saying i will entertain at your proposal, but it has to increase the appointment by 20%. that is more work. he was demanding more work if he was going to make any kind of waiver. they simply misrepresented the facts in that issue. they want to make a political issue and say that, you know, this president does not want people to work. he just wants to send out checks. that idea is a political -- it shows that the facts are wrong. i sit on that committee. i was there when it was written, and that is not true. host: your committee and others

responsible for the payroll tax cut which is used to fund social security. cady o'donnell from the national journal pointing out that there's really no sentiment to keep this tax cut in place and it will likely referred back to 6.2 the sun in january. are you hearing the same thing? guest: yes, i am worried about the social security. when you get your check and i get my check and we are under 6% for our social security, i worry if we reduce it too far, there will not be any money either. right now, everybody's taking care of to 275 or someplace out there. it is done, but if we reduce the tax, we can weekend our own social security and a lot of people in this country are living on that. i think the sentiment in the congress is to let that tax go back to where it would double dose was. host: this is from our twitter page --

guest: well, i think that is what the papers were indicating this morning. the president has said he will extend all the tax cuts for everybody under $250,000. that is most americans. 90% -- something. i am not sure, but it is close to that. most of us understand that we live in a country that is the most wonderful country in the world, and we can do the things we can because of this wonderful country, but it does not come free. you have to pay for it. we think the shot -- people should pay out of their ability to pay. i think there will be a tax greece for anybody over that amount. not for anybody under that amount. host: for the first $250,000, at the lower rate, does it then

kick in above? >> at $250,000, you start paying the higher rate. host: springfield, missouri, democrats. caller: thank you. i just read a book by a doctor from oklahoma and he said the problem was the ring of power, people at the top, senate and democrats. you cannot get anything passed them because of lobbyists, etc, and their staff. most of his, something like 48% this fraud. i do not know how they get anything past the ring of power and the lobbyists that are connected to the system, because they keep getting elected over and over again. so everything is up to us to get

rid of these people in power that have been up there for 25 and 30 years. guest: you're talking to a guy who has been here for 25 years. i hope i get reelected. i have been working hard at it. i do not think it is how long you have been here. i think it is whether or not you're connected to the people who have been here. 700,000 people give me their trust every two years and say go back to washington, d.c., and get the best deal you can for us. they have set me back with 80% of votes over and over again. now, i think that what it says is they know who i am. and i think people have to be more involved in figuring out who the candidate is and what they really believe. because you cannot send somebody to washington who says a few phrases and puts up a lot of ads, and then suddenly when you get here, they think, i did not

know he thought that. the american public has got to get involved in who they sent here. the problem, of course, money is making it hard because television ads overwhelm every other source of information. it is and messy process. winston churchill said that a democracy is the worst form of government and so you consider the alternative -- alternatives. i think everybody should be involved. i do not always agree with my constituents. they do not always agree with me. that is what democracy is about. every two years, they have a chance to say, we have had enough of you and we will put somebody else there. that is the way it should be. i did not inherit this job. i believe i am up there representing 700,000 people in this area and around seattle, and whatever they not -- one, i will try to figure it out and represent them in that way. i can then resist the lobbyists who say you have got to do this

or you have got to do that. well, i do not have to if the people support me. host: a representative from north carolina says the bill of the tax cut would reduce the annual avocet -- deficit by 5%. is this really significant? guest: it is part of what has to happen. there is no single silver bullet that will do the whole thing. but 5% is 5%. i am not quite sure where he gets that figure from. but it is clear that the give- away over the course of the last 10 years, 12 years, by the bush tax cuts, have been a part of it. the other part we have to deal with is wars. we're spending an awful lot of money in afghanistan. i am one of those people who think they should bring the troops home now. i been it is over. they announced today that the search people are home. but people are still getting killed today. i think it is time to admit we

have done all we can for afghanistan. it is their turn to take their country and run it as they see fit. host: cbs news reported that 68,000 troops still on the ground in afghanistan. guest: yes, and that costs us billions of dollars each month. that is the other part of the deficit we have to think about, the way we're spending money in defense. host: the source of this information is the association of american medical colleges. the most recent figures showing that the doctor shortage is roughly about 20,000 to 25,000 cockleburs but increasing significantly. even without the health care law, it would be close to 100,000 by the year 2025. when the new health care law, upwards of 125,000 over the next 12 to 14 years? guest: that is correct. it is a major man and woman- power question. medicine is now almost half and half, doctors men and women. it is an issue that we have not paid attention to.

we said, let the market handle it. the market has not handled it because if you do not expand the medical schools, you do not have enough people coming out to fill the jobs, you have to make some decisions about manpower. that is why i put this bill in. because i want people to start talking about where we are going to get the doctors to take care of us. host: so this is not passed the house said. guest: it is not going to pass in this session. but i wanted out there for discussion because we're going to come into 2013, and as we are implementing the law, we have to think about where these people are going to find a doctor. i hear from my constituents frequently that i cannot find a doctor who will take me, and that is the real problem for people today already. going to get worse. host: one of our viewers says permanently extending the bush tax cuts could increase the federal debt by almost $3 trillion over the next 10 years.

we have a call on the phone from pennsylvania. you are calling on the the republican line. caller: good morning. i enjoy your show. i actually voted for the gentleman when i was living in san francisco. host: he is from washington state, so i am not sure you voted for him. caller: san francisco is in washington state, yes. i am on social security and i am hearing stories about the secondary insurance being dramatically decreased and also about a huge amount of money being taken out of social security. i was wondering what the gentleman has to say about th. and as the ever resolved the wiretap conviction that he had with newt gingrich? thank you. host: before you send e-mails,

we know that san francisco is in california, not washington state. we want to get that on the record. guest: you know, social security is a favorite whipping boy. people have always said we shall not have this program because it smacks of socialism of some sort. but people are counting on social security, and congress has taken care of it. we made changes in it. and it is going to be there until 27 to five or so. right now, we have already got that in. -- it is going to be there and tell 2075 or so. right now, you only contribute for social security up to $106,000. and then youet a holiday. you do not pay your taxes on it anymore. anybody who is making $106,000 knows this. people making less than that cannot understand it. but we can easily fix anything and social security. the question about the conviction. i was not convicted of anything.

i was fighting the first amendment so that you can have information. what was being attempted was to prevent the american people from knowing what members of congress are talking about and what they were doing, and i went to court and, ultimately, you still had your first man in red. you can have things on television and in the papers because i fought a case that cost a lot of money -- you are right, but it certainly was worth it because i believe in the first amendment. knowledge is what makes a democracy. host: two final points. this is from our twitter page -- georgia is on the phone, democrats line, last word. caller: good morning, to a for c-span. -- thank you for c-span. i am a wannabe business owner. this has to do with the health care.

and i cannot understand -- first of all, i want healthy employees. said dick -- second of all, i cannot understand why, with everything involved in running a business, the health care for an individual should be the business owner's responsibility. i think this should all be -- we should have national health care across the board. if the rich go out and do with the what to do, then do it. host: what is your business, by the way? caller: i just run a small home- based business. host: how many employees do you have? caller: one. mrcanoe.com. that was a plug. it should be the individual's responsibility to get insurance. it is too much to run

businesses, just so much. host: we will get a response. thank you for calling. guest: first of all, with your small business, you're not required to provide any insurance for your employees, because you do not have any. but the fact is that you are right, i personally favor a universal health care system, a single-payer system where everybody pays their taxes under the table. and when you get sick, the government pays for it. it is a financing system but you could have a private delivery system. the doctors are not government employees, the nurses are not, none of the hospitals are. you can have all that be private. but the best and the most simple financing system is a single- payer system which is used in most industrialized countries in the world. so it is the most efficient way to do it, however, this country is wedded to the idea that we want to keep it in the private sector. i oppose that idea, but that is what we decided we're going to

do. that is why you had the system that is constructed this way. we kept private insurance companies in. we were going to have a public option. people could opt out of the private system and on to the public system, and congress decided by a majority vote, no, that is not going to happen. we have this system. we will see how it works. we will keep improving it. host: who will be the speaker of the house and the next congress? guest: nancy pelosi host: you think she can take back the house? kuchar engine mark guest: i think there is a very angry movement out there. they recognize that they have to have a change in leadership. the tea party has brought them nothing. the tea party people have said, let's tear down government. but they have no plan for what they were going to build up in its place. americans want the government. one example, we have done votes 302 times to lift environmental

regulations on the environment. every bowl in the house has been to repeal environmental regulations. people want clean air and clean water. they want to have protection in consumer protection and all these things. i think they're going to make a change in this election. i think you'll find a lot of people will not be back in the next election and have control. c-span3 jim mcdermott, duet for being with us. when we come back, we will continue the conversation. we will get the republican said. representative joe barton of texas who is a member of the house energy & commerce. we will about energy issues, the 112th congress, and upcoming elections. it is friday morning, september 21. tomorrow is the first official day of fall. we're back in a moment.

>> all this weekend, "book tv's" live coverage from the national mall with two days of interviews and presentations. and your phone calls, e-mails, and tweets starting saturday morning at 10:00 a.m. eastern and sunday at noon, live on c- span2. >> we have to crack down on china went they cheat. they manipulate their currency. [applause] they still patents and designs. they have counterfeit goods. and i know the want to be a responsible partner in the world of trade and commerce. they are going to have to understand, they cannot take away jobs on an unfair basis. >> he made money investing in

companies that uprooted from here and went to china. pioneers. ohio, you cannot stand up to china. when all you have done is send them our jobs. >> watch and engage with c-span as the campaigns move towards the november elections. international issues and foreign policy will be the focus of debate no. 3. the first debate on domestic issues will take place monday, october 3. audience members will get a chance to ask questions in a town hall debate on tuesday, october 16. a final debate on foreign policy on october 22. and what to the single vice- presidential candidates debate on thursday, october 11. follow our coverage on c-span, c-span radio, and c-span.org. "washington journal" continues. host: we want to welcome congressman joe barton from texas. member of the house energy & commerce. let me ask as some of the things

that congress will not accomplish this year. the farm bill, why such an inability to get a major piece of legislation to a republican- controlled house? guest: well, it is republican house but a democrat said. you have got to keep that in mind. i think the primary reason is that some of the more conservative republicans, and i am certainly consider myself to be a conservative republican, want to really take a look at the costs in not just the farm program but all the programs. so you have a disagreement, if that is the right term, about the spending levels. having said that, i think the majority of the house republicans would vote for a farm bill if it is critical on the floor and some amendments are made in order so some of these issues can be worked out through the regular order on four votes. and hopefully when we come back

in november after the election, we will get that worked out. host: giving full courtesy to the "new york times," which has been writing about this, calling it the least productive congress in a generation. this congress passing 100 of its republic laws of the -- as of last month. the so-called do nothing congress back in 1948, the same two-year time span, passing 906 laws. a huge difference. some may say that is a good thing because it means you're regulations. guest: i would not rate the congress on how many laws that has passed. we could pass a resolution proclaiming national dona de and that would be a law, but that does not mean it it is substantive. the issue really is you have a republican-controlled house and a democratic-controlled senate. and i would say fairly left to center president. they are realistic disagreements

between what we think the solutions are. we have passed a number of bills in the house that i thought were very good pieces of legislation that did not even get a hearing in the senate. so it is not all bad that we have not gotten some of these -- a bunch of bill's done, but i think on the big issues, you know, we do need to address the deficit. we do need to address spending. i think we need to pass a constitutional amendment requiring a lanced budget to the states. and the house has passed some of those bills. the senate did not even take up the budget. i think the majority of the senate voted against the balanced budget amendment to the constitution. so we have divided government. when you have divided government, you do not have a consensus. when you do not have instances, you do not get a lot done. host: the inspector general of the justice department out with

his 471-page report, looking at the fast & furious operation. the "new york times" says it included the deputy assistant attorney general who was supposed to be aware of what was happening and was not fully informed of everything that was going on. and your colleague, representative cummings from maryland, had this to say before the house oversight committee. [video clip] >> i also want to commend the attorney general. i have lost count of how many times he has testified on this issue. but he has remained even-handed, respectful, and always true to the critical mission of the department he leaves. he requested this investigation, and he has already put numerous reforms in place. to that end, i note that the administration did not exert executive privilege over any part of the inspector general's report.

over any of the documents relied on by the inspector general. in fact, the department went a step further. yesterday, it sent to this committee more than 300 pages of additional documents that were withheld previously. host: what is your reaction to your colleague, a democrat elisa cummings, and the report? are you satisfied? guest: first of all, i have great respect for congressmen cummings. he is a great congressmen in a man of integrity. i will say that what he said was truthful, but perhaps he did not tell the entire story. the attorney general was held in contempt of congress. that is unprecedented, i think. the attorney general did withhold documents, refused to get documents to the committee, saying we're investigating fast & furious. and my recollection is that they did, at some point in the document request from the house,

claim executive privilege. what congress meant timing's just said was that in the investigation by the inspector general -- what the congress manages said was that whatever the inspector general requested, the attorney general provided. it is possible that he, the attorney general, was more forthcoming with the inspector general than he was with the house of representatives. so far as what congressman cummings said, i think he is telling the truth as he knows it and he's giving his opinion that there is a broader picture. again, it is extremely unusual for an attorney general of the united states who is interested as the chief law-enforcement officer of the executive branch to be held in contempt of congress. host: a couple of issues bigger

this is from our twitter page -- guest: ronald reagan, for one. because i voted for it in 1985. did not get many votes, but i was one of them. no, president bush submitted budgets that balance. the second president bush, we had four balanced budgets on the cash flow basis under president clinton and the first year that president bush was president. host: or the bush era tax cuts in the state as we look at the deficit now or the debt of $16 trillion? guest: our problem is not tax revenue. our problem is spending. i think the bush tax cuts were positive for the economy. host: democrats say with those tax cuts, in addition to the two wars, the development of a new department of homeland security, that both democrats and republicans did not do enough to

pay for those operations. guest: my democrat friends enjoy spending money. they do not enjoy paying for what they spend. there is this little thing called the laugher curve -- laffer curve, and it may be out of a to talk about it, but as you take tax rates down, you get more revenue because people work harder and more wealth is created. we have shown that time and again. the bush tax cuts, i think, created a lot more wealth than they lost tax revenue. and while revenues did go down slightly for some time, our problem is that spending has been going up, some years in almost double digit rates, and we have got no plan. the democrats certainly have no plans to bring that under control. the president's budget that he has to submit to congress each year does not show a deficit

under i think half a trillion 2 $1 trillion at any time. host: a call on our republican line. caller: good morning. i want to let you know that i am and african-american and i plan to vote for mitt romney. and i changed my registration to republican because of what is going on in the country now. i am very worried about my children. not really as much for me, but it is not fair for my kids to the problems with on that are going on now. they should be able to live like i did when i was growing up. i wanted to just say thank you so much for -- and that republicans only have the house,

and thank you for trying to do all of you can. i know it is hard because there are a lot of things that the media will not let the people know or tried to withhold, especially what is going on in libya. host: thank you. we will get a response. guest: i want to thank her for switching registration in for deciding to vote for governor romney. we're in the same boat. i am going to vote for the governor also. i do think that the republican party has a great message for african-americans. we're the party of hope and opportunity and inclusion. in my congressional district down in texas, i have got a large number of african american supporters and i value their input and support greatly. so we're glad to have her as a part of the republican party in north carolina. host: one of our viewers saying we do not need to amend the constitution to balance the budget. we need representative barton to

do his job. guest: well, if every otherm everyan voted the way of voted over the last 24 years, we would have had a lot more balanced budgets. if that is the correct term, is correct. you do not have to have a balanced amendment, but it would be helpful. the states that have it, they have a lot more balanced budgets than states that do not. if we had it at the federal level, we would not have a balanced budget every year because there are exceptions for time of war and economic depressions and things like that, but we would have the more often than not. in my lifetime, i was born in 1949, we have had five balanced budgets. one of those was an accounting gimmick that president nixon used one year. he had five quarters of revenue with only four quarters of spending. the other four were during the

newt gingrich speech circuit -- speakership era. we had four balanced budgets in a row. host: democrats line, richmond, virginia. caller: good morning. how're you doing this morning? the biggest problem we have is the overall analysis is flawed. the money does not trickled down, it trickles up. we do not need -- [ indiscernible] the consumers, they need us. that is the biggest flop. the money comes from us. if you screw up our money, you're going to screw yourself up. simple as that. guest: well, i do not know that i gave an economic analysis about where the money comes from, but i do agree that wealth

is created in the private sector when you put capital and labor with raw materials together. you create products or services that consumers purchase. there are a lot of people that work for themselves, self- employed. most people work for corporations or companies to create products and services that consumers buy. we have shown that time-after time real wealth is created in the private sector through free markets and transparency, not by public works programs that provide short-term spending but no long-term economic impact. so i really did not give an economic model, but i do not have a problem with her pointing

out that it is the private sector that creates the wealth. in order to have money to spend some of those people have to have a job, and most jobs are created in the private sector. host: we normally do not ask about the entire of our guests, but i have to ask about your tie. i have to ask what you're wearing. guest: well, i am wearing mine disney mickey mouse tie. today's the last day of congress before the election. host: show that so the audience can see it. guest: usually when i go home to texas, i wear a texas tie. but since it is the last day of congress before the election, i wore my disney tie to show how happy i am to be going home. host: on a much more serious note, because it was written about this morning, this is the earliest date for congress to recess since 1960.

six to seven weeks for you and your colleagues to campaign. guest: i think that is good news for the american people. their congressmen and senators will be out in their states and districts. and certain congressmen have elections and competitive races. i have a very good democrat opponent. it gives the voters a chance to see as up close and personal. i think that is good and not bad. if there were to be some emergency, i think the speaker and majority leader would call congress back. but absent something catastrophic, i think it is very good that we get to go home and not get there the last minute. what has not been said is that, in all probability, after the election there will be several more weeks of congress as we do things like you have already talked about, the farm bill and maybe some other issues that we have not got wrapped up yet.

host: ronald from misery. thank you for waiting. -- ronald from missouri. caller: all monetary bills originate in the house of representatives. the spending that has been going on, the fact that we are over budget, the fact that we have had two wars and we have not paid for them, the fact that congress is leaving shows that there's no concern for the american people. there is only concerned for themselves and for their own reelection. my question is, why should we hire them back? guest: well, i point out the

obvious, in the house, every forressman is up reelection. our terms are two years. most of them have competition. so if the gentleman does not prefer his current congressman, he has an alternative. he has a right to vote for the alternative. i think we should be -- each individual congressman should be evaluated every two years on their merits. i have run 14 times and won, and i am running f-15's time. i hope i get to represent the sixth district of texas again, but it is up to the people to come out and vote. the senate is a different and iraq -- animal feed their six- year terms. the president, as no, is a four- year term. as the president obama is asking to be reelected for his second term. but the ultimate power is in the hands of the people, and it is

up to them to decide who they want to represent them. i would take exception to one thing he said, that the congress is only concerned about its re- election. that is not true. on both sides of the aisle, i would say the overwhelming majority are very concerned about the country, and we want to do the right thing. the thing that most people do not understand is that in a country this large and this diverse, what my constituents think is the right thing to do is sometimes not the same as the minority leader nancy pelosi's constituency in san francisco. or the gentleman from washington that was on the program before me, he has a much more liberal voting record than i do. he represents a more liberal part of the country in washington state. i represent a more conservative part of the country in central texas.

so the beauty of democracy is, over time, we start here and we end up here, and hopefully here is for the good of the country. but the reason congress starts out here is because, on many issues, that is where different groups in the country are. instead of yelling and screaming, we come into the capital and we talk and debate and offer amendments and narrow the differences. ultimately, we get stuff done the the country wants done. host: did you sign the norquist no tax pledge? guest: i have. host: if the president is reelected, this person can see that taxes will go up next year. do you agree? guest: i will not vote to raise taxes. i am just one vote. i think what the congressman is saying is that he expects the president to push and mandate a

tax increase, perhaps in exchange for some spending deductions. that is a part of the democratic process that we will deal with if president obama is reelected, which i hope he is not. as i have already pointed out, i am going to vote for governor romney. hopefully i will be working, if i am reelected, with president romney and we will be talking about reducing spending and cutting taxes and crating opportunity in the private sector for people to find employment. host: you would vote against a tax increase, but you would concede that they could very well go up if the president is reelected? guest: i will concede that president obama will probably attempt to raise taxes. he is campaigning on that. he calls it his tax on millionaires. that is his prerogative if he's reelected. i do not personally think a lot of people in america want to see

their income taxes raised. but that is what elections are about. host: oklahoma, republican line. caller: 41, i just became a republican -- for one, i just became a republican after 40 years of being a democrat. obama, went the health care law, said if you like your insurance, we should be able to keep it. one week after he signed the law -- i am disabled, and i had health care through my employer. one week after he signed that law, i was dumped on to medicare. and i do not like the fact that the health care law was rammed down our throats. and having nancy pelosi stand there and say we have got to pass it so we will know what is in it -- to me, that is no way

to pass laws. guest: i agree with him. i voted against the health care a lot every chance i could win and was going through the house and committee and on the floor. i voted to repeal it, all in parts of it, a number of times in this congress. what the caller said is right, president obama did say that -- when he was pushing the bill that is now the law, that if you like your insurance, you could keep it. well, if it is fully implemented, in my opinion, most employer-sponsored health care plans are going to go away, because the difference in the mandated costs of the coverage they have to provide and what is called a penalty in the bill but which the supreme court has said is a tax, that differential, the cost is, on average, probably $10,000 per person per year.

and the penalty or the tax if you eliminate the health coverage and put them into these exchanges, public plans, is i think no more than $2,000. so you take that differential, which could be $5,000 up to $10,000 per employee if you do not provide health insurance and you just pay the penalty or the tax and put them into the exchanges, most corporations and companies are going to do that. because it is such huge cash flow advantage to not provide health insurance. so the president's promise, if you like your health insurance, you can keep it, it is simply not going to be sustainable. i'd think the president knew that when he made that statement. host: we carry this program live

on c-span radio, xm radio, and radio here in washington. a phone call from illinois, good morning. caller: i am calling from the home of ronald reagan. he lived right down the street. my question -- no, i have been falling politics. i remember in 2000 when george w. bush became president. we had a $259 billion budget surplus. then the republicans took control of the house and senate. they were talking about, yeah, we're going to give $1.2 trillion in tax cuts. in 2003, i believe it was $1.30 trillion in tax cuts. everybody said, no, do not do it, because you're going to blow a $5.60 trillion hole in the budget. and now, that is one of my

questions. also, you said policies that are supposed to be job-related and everybody can see that these bills that you send over, you knew, you your heart that these bills would not be taken up by the democrats because that is the way you wanted it because you are falling right with mitch mcconnell, that you want to make this a one-term president. you need to answer to the american people why, one, did you distribute the wealth from the middle-class, the poor, to the upper class, and we'll look at 1 million galt -- jobs during the persian administration? host: we will get a response. thank you. guest: first of all, there were budget surpluses when president bush came into office. as i said, we had three balanced budgets under president clinton

with republican house leadership. and then we had won with bush as president. and we did pass from -- some tax cuts, and i think those were positive. but the caller did not admit something called 9/11 when we had a terrorist attack on the united states happen on september 11, 2001. that changed the economic equation not just in the united states but around the world. that caused a severe recession. people pulled back, you know, and as that happened, then we had this situation with the banks. they had all their problems, and we all know about that. so the economic problems that we have had in the last 10 years are not because of the bush tax

cuts. i would say they are in spite of them. again, if you look at the charts, there has been a slight decline in revenue and is the beginning to come back. but the problem is not the revenue line. the problem is the spending line. you know, my first year in congress back in 1985, the entire federal budget, the entire federal budget was less than $1 trillion. this year, the total spending of the federal budget, i think $3.60 trillion, and the deficit, the deficit was projected to be $1.50 trillion, and i think it is going to come in about $1.11 trillion. this will be the third year in a row that we have had the deficit, the money we have to borrow, over $1 trillion. and that is more than the entire federal budget was my first year in congress in 1985.

host: if you repeal obamacare, would you replace it with universal government providing health care for all? guest: i would not. first, i would repeal it. second, i would replace it, but not with the universal one-size- fits-all government health care. i would build on the private market. i would cover preexisting conditions. i would allow physicians to balance the bill. a would begin to reform medicare and medicaid. i would put more money into doctor and physician training. and the show or earlier, you were talking about the physician shortage, but i would use a market-based system. i would not use a one size fits all social medicine at system like they have in canada or in

most of the european countries. markets work when you allow them to work. you need transparency. you need a proper price signals, and you need quality indicators. then you need competition so that people can have choices. that kind of health care system would provide quality health care at a reduced rate and put the patient in the driver's seat along with their individual doctors. host: the problem is the spending line -- who are the highest spenders in the last 30 years? joseph joining us from atlanta. good morning. are you with us? we will go on to new york city, tom. republican line. caller: hello, i just wanted to say, they say that the president stood for the bequest. he is terrible for theiddle- class.

every tax and everything is geared towards the middle class so you can give away to the poor who want hand-outs. it is ridiculous. he said tax everyone evenly and that is it. host: thank you. we will go on to maryland, democrats line. caller: good morning. i believe you are a member of the energy subcommittee. guest: yes. caller: i believe that there are three times the republicans have supported the concept i am in favor of, allowing competition on the gas pump. between dazzling, ethanol, and methanol. that is president reagan who signed the bill that actually encourage the first flex fuel cars to include methanol in 1988. president bush signed an executive order -- the first one was the alternative fuels act, i

believe. in 1989, president bush signed an exhibit of order that mandated about 1 million flex fuel cars to include methanol as an option by 1995. finally, i believe that in 2011, some republican congressmen offered an open field standard act which would allow methanol to compete at the gas pump with gasoline and ethanol. i assume that was based on the 2010 report with m.i.t. that said methanol can be produced as cheap as gasoline and requiring no subsidy. a study said our cars could be modified for about $200, and methanol is produced by our abundant natural gas. guest: you have got a lot of technical terms their pick of is the comic gasoline is refined from crude oil. methanol is produced from

natural gas. and ethanol is produced primarily in this country from corn, although it can be produced from sugar beets in things like that. so there have been a number of alternative fuel amendments offered, and president bush did sign an executive order. i think the caller is correct about the flex fuel. generally, i think it is a truism that republicans support competition. we do not support mandates, although some republicans have supported the mandate for ethanol. both that it be produced and that it be used. but we would prefer that there be a market competition system so that people have those choices. in most cases, ethanol and methanol are going to be blended into the gasoline, not used as a

pure substitute fuel. and the reason that methanol would be so competitive today is because the price of natural gas, which has been as high as $15,000, is now in the neighborhood of $3 per 1000 cubic feet. the u.s. as the most eminent supplies of natural gas in the world, and we had the most cost- competitive market for natural gas in the world. that is what methanol could be used to be blended into gasoline. under current law, it is not a requirement, but there is a requirement for it ethanol to be used and blended. host: one final point. were you in the meeting yesterday with the secretary of state, the national security briefing on this abortion in libya? guest: i was invited but did not attend. host: some of your colleagues

said they did not get the answers they were looking for. guest: i am sure that is a true statement. host: why did you get guest: the: i had some other meetings that were already scheduled. that was a meeting that was scheduled very late the day before, and i already had previous commitments. host: we have about one minute left. john on the phone from richmond, virginia. caller: two things to point up. first of all, with all due respect, i would like to point out that you are dead wrong about george bush having a balanced budget. the very first fiscal year for george bush, which would have been 2002, the deficit was over $400 billion. guest: his first year in office, get a balanced budget. host: massachusetts, a quick question. caller: we pridese